True Champion is still Nadal NOT Federer.

There is so much talk on ESPN, NYTimes... everywhere that if Federer wins he will be the greatest player ever to play Tennis.

First, I wouldn't be surprised if the Swede beats Federer, Fed can no way deal with huge power flat-balls to the backhand at the base-line - we've all seen this with today's match with Del Potre.

Secondly, even if he does win, he still has LOST to Nadal much more than Nadal beating Federer. Madrid doesn't count because of his knee.

How can there be a greatest player ever if one player consistently beats him 5 times out of 7? We should all root for the TRUE CHAMPION RAFA NADAL when he comes back for the US open when his Knee heals.

Federer played earlier in his career when Nadal was not competing he was playing in a clown era where there wasn't truly great players and Marat Safin was burnt out, etc.

Nadal needs to win more Grand Slams in order match or surpass Federer's record. I know he will but with a very big possibility of being injured ... time will tell ... So for now based on stats, the title "Greatest Player" will go to Federer if he will win on sunday.

I'm a Nadal fan and I like him to stay healthy to win more Grand Slams more than Federer. His time will come.

Nadal needs to win more Grand Slams in order match or surpass Federer's record. I know he will but with a very big possibility of being injured ... time will tell ... So for now based on stats, the title "Greatest Player" will go to Federer if he will win on sunday.

I'm a Nadal fan and I like him to stay healthy to win more Grand Slams more than Federer. His time will come.

Well I'm a Fan of Tennis so I take a bias view on this. Let's say Federer doesn't win tomorrow but goes on to reclaim the Wimbledon Trophy which I feel he is the favorite such as Nadal is the favorite on Clay? Obviously it's extremely difficult to win all four Majors given only Andre Agassi in the Open Era has pulled it off and he's never considered the greatest.

As good as Ivan Lendl & Pete Sampras, they couldn't do it. Even Mats Wilander had a fantastic run during his rein but alas fell short. So my point is, Should Roger not win tomorrow he will not be considered the Best Ever and to be quite honest I'm one that believes Roger needs to beat Nadal in the French Finals in order to prove he can do it against the guy who stopped him 3 previous times.

To be considered the GOAT is one of those things that makes Tennis so interesting. On the Women's side I guess it's not as difficult but even with 22 Grand Slam Titles, there are still many who do not give Steffi Graf her due.

So it really doesn't matter what Roger does tomorrow, there will still be plenty of people that refuse to give him that honor. Let's say Roger wins no less than 5 of each major except the French where he doesn't win at all. To me that's pretty impressive stats and with him at least getting to the finals now 4 times, I'm leaning towards him as the record holder.

Rafael Nadal has a long road to go before he achieves that milestone.

The only acceptable loss is when your opponent was better than you on that given day.
It is never acceptable to lose when your opponent was not.

i agree with the opposition. Nadal is awesome on and off the court. But to put him on the same level as Sampras and Federer isn't fair to either of them. i have little doubt that Rafa will break down like many people claim. Nadal, in my opinion, will go on to win atleast 4 more slams. until that happens, let's just enjoy the show.

i agree with the opposition. Nadal is awesome on and off the court. But to put him on the same level as Sampras and Federer isn't fair to either of them. i have little doubt that Rafa will break down like many people claim. Nadal, in my opinion, will go on to win atleast 4 more slams. until that happens, let's just enjoy the show.

Nicely put LT - I couldn't even understand the title of the Thread actually. To even consider Roger Federer as not a Champion is more than crazy. Currently Roger is the greatest Champion amongst those who are playing this game.

Pete Sampras has an astounding 14 Grand Slam Titles over his career and Federer has 13 thus far which is amazing. Even the great Andre Agassi and Ivan Lendl only amassed 8 Slams each. It's not easy to win a major particularly with the talent of the current crop of Players out there.

Look at how fantastic Juan Del Potro is and still he lost after beating up on Roger 2 Sets to none. I sure hope no one tries to take away anything Federer has accomplished because this guy has certainly earned it.

The only acceptable loss is when your opponent was better than you on that given day.
It is never acceptable to lose when your opponent was not.

I disagree with the idea of letting Federer beat Nadal in order to be considered greatest player. Your achievements will determine to be considered greatest player at the present time.

What if Federer will beat Nadal in Wimbeldon then retires ... then later Nadal will win 15 Grand Slams with a career grand slam ... Will you not consider Nadal the greatest because he was beaten by Federer before he retires? or If there's a "new breed nameless player" that Nadal will be struglling to deafeat on his 15th Grand Slams ... will you say that Nadal is not the greatest because he's strugling to win with "new breed nameless player"?

What if Federer wont beat Nadal but Nadal will not win for than 8 Grand Slams will you argue that he's the greatest player because he has beaten federer even with only 8Grand slams?

Again, I'm a Nadal fan. great achivements needs time, no shortcuts, not by beating a single player like Federer ... I would like Nadal to win more in the years to come. Federer days are almost over ...

"Give honor to whom honor is due" .... our time will come to defend Nadal as a greatest player not at this present time.

I disagree with the idea of letting Federer beat Nadal in order to be considered greatest player. Your achievements will determine to be considered greatest player at the present time.

What if Federer will beat Nadal in Wimbeldon then retires ... then later Nadal will win 15 Grand Slams with a career grand slam ... Will you not consider Nadal the greatest because he was beaten by Federer before he retires? or If there's a "new breed nameless player" that Nadal will be struglling to deafeat on his 15th Grand Slams ... will you say that Nadal is not the greatest because he's strugling to win with "new breed nameless player"?

What if Federer wont beat Nadal but Nadal will not win for than 8 Grand Slams will you argue that he's the greatest player because he has beaten federer even with only 8Grand slams?

Again, I'm a Nadal fan. great achivements needs time, no shortcuts, not by beating a single player like Federer ... I would like Nadal to win more in the years to come. Federer days are almost over ...

"Give honor to whom honor is due" .... our time will come to defend Nadal as a greatest player not at this present time.

Well Said .. there's nothing I can add to that. You're point is without argument. It's like those who refuse to give Steffi Graf her due because Monica Seles was stabbed and at that time, was the dominant player.

I can see if it was another situation like that Skater who plotted to have her rival take out so she could win the Gold Medal but Steffi had nothing to do with the stabbing.

Let's take the stabbing out of the equation, what if Monica simply feel down and broke her leg and in her absence Steffi ran off 3 or 4 Slam Titles? Would people claim she would not have if Monica was healthy? Well maybe but Sports is Sports and tragic as it was because I'm a Monica Seles Fan and always will be, she wasn't there to prevent Steffi but others were and they failed to stop her. And even with 22 Grand Slam Singles Titles, she's still not considered the GOAT by many but in my book, she is.

Not only did she win 22 Grand Slam Singles Titles but also the Calendar Slam which even Martina Navratilova couldn't do and in that same year 1988 also won the Gold Medal. Heck if that ain't the best there is , then what in the World are you doubters waiting for? Please tell me ....

.

The only acceptable loss is when your opponent was better than you on that given day.
It is never acceptable to lose when your opponent was not.

Not only did she win 22 Grand Slam Singles Titles but also the Calendar Slam which even Martina Navratilova couldn't do and in that same year 1988 also won the Gold Medal. Heck if that ain't the best there is , then what in the World are you doubters waiting for? Please tell me ....

.

maybe people are looking for an immortal.. one who is always there to defend their title.

I have no doubt that Nadal will achieve a career slam, especially after he won on the grass. But he sure does have a long way until he can be called a "True Champion". I believe his style of play is the reason for his injuries.